list_integration_wifi_broadcasts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states a 'paginated list' is returned, which is helpful, but fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only, any authentication needs, or potential rate limits. The phantom 'settings' parameter undermines reliability.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured with an Args section and Returns, but it includes redundant phrasing ('via the integration API') and an extra line for the phantom 'settings' parameter. Could be more concise without sacrificing accuracy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values extensively, but it does mention 'paginated list'. Missing is a comparison with the singular get endpoint or any prerequisite context. Overall adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It does describe the three schema parameters (site_id, limit, offset) adequately, but erroneously includes a 'settings' parameter not present in the schema, confusing the agent.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (List) and resource (WiFi broadcasts/SSIDs). It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_integration_wifi_broadcast' by using 'list' vs 'get'. However, the inclusion of a non-existent parameter 'settings' slightly diminishes clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_integration_wifi_broadcast'. It only implies the usage through the name and parameter descriptions, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.